Final California 2020 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name:	Spring Creek (Nevada County)
Water Body ID:	CAR5173203120110209094624
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	123447	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Oxygen, Dissolved
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three lines of evidence are available to assess for Cold Freshwater Habitat (COLD). Two lines of evidence are available to assess for Fish Spawning (SPWN). Four of the 187 samples exceed the objective for COLD. Zero of the 48 samples exceed the objective for SPWN. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Four of the 187 samples exceed the objective for COLD. Zero of the 48 samples exceed the objective for SPWN. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123447, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

59370

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Four of the 87 daily averaged samples exceeded the water quality objective for dissolved oxygen in this water body.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants at Placer County Utilities, 2005-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the Basin Plan, the minimum level for dissolved oxygen is 7 mg/L for waters designated as COLD.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples collected at site 21 - Spring Ck.

Temporal Representation:

Samples collected between 4/7/2001 and 7/10/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

CITIZEN WATER MONITORING QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE YUBA WATERSHED MONITORING COMMITTEE (June 30, 2008)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123447, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

208987

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SYRCL River Monitoring Program data for Spring Creek (Nevada County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 29 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as COLD is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2014-11-15

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123447, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

208439

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as SPWN is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2014-11-15

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123447, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

208746

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SYRCL River Monitoring Program data for Spring Creek (Nevada County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as SPWN is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123447, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

208415

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as COLD is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee


DECISION ID	127315	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Specific Conductivity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 141 samples exceed the objective for Municipal & Domestic Supply. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 141 samples exceeded the objective for Municipal & Domestic Supply and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This decision was made by SWRCB staff.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 127315, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230036

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SYRCL River Monitoring Program data for Spring Creek (Nevada County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 27 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for SpecificConductivity.

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin for specific conductance is 900 uS/cm.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2014-11-15

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 127315, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

59369

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 95 daily averaged samples exceeded the water quality objective for electrical conductivity in this water body.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants at Placer County Utilities, 2005-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The secondary MCLs for electrical conductivity provide a range of values including a recommended level (900 uS/cm), upper level (1600 uS/cm) and a short-term level (2200 uS/cm). The 'recommended' level of 900 uS/cm was used as it is intended to be protective of all drinking water uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449.

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples collected at site 21 - Spring Ck.

Temporal Representation:

Samples collected between 4/7/2001 and 7/10/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

CITIZEN WATER MONITORING QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE YUBA WATERSHED MONITORING COMMITTEE (June 30, 2008)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 127315, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

229926

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee


DECISION ID	123449	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 141 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for COLD. Zero of the 46 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for Fish Spawning and Fish Migration. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 141 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for COLD. Zero of the 46 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for Fish Spawning and Fish Migration, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This decision was made by SWRCB staff.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123449, Temperature, water	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230479

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2014-11-15

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123449, Temperature, water	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230599

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123449, Temperature, water	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230600

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2014-11-15

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123449, Temperature, water	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230481

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Fish Migration

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2014-11-15

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123449, Temperature, water	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230500

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123449, Temperature, water	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230689

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Fish Migration

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123449, Temperature, water	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

71534

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 95 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for temperature in this water body (SYRCL, 2010).

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses. In determining compliance with the water quality objectives for temperature, appropriate averaging periods may be applied provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Pg. III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The lethal temperature threshold for Steelhead adult migration and holding and juvenile growth and rearing is 24 degrees Celsius. (Carter, 2008).

Guideline Reference:

Effects of Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen/Total Dissolved Gas, Ammonia, and pH on Salmonids. Implications for California's North Coast TMDLs. California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following location: SYRCL monitoring station 21, Spring Ck

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly from 4/7/2001 to 7/10/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

CITIZEN WATER MONITORING QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE YUBA WATERSHED MONITORING COMMITTEE (June 30, 2008)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	123448	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	pH
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Nine lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Six of the 131 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for COLD. One of the 41 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for REC-1, REC-2, and SHELL. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Six of the 131 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for COLD. One of the 41 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for REC-1, REC-2, and SHELL, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This decision was made by SWRCB staff.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

59377

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Five of the 90 daily averaged samples exceeded the water quality objective for pH in this water body (they were below 6.5).

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants at Placer County Utilities, 2005-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the Basin Plan, pH levels should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples collected at site 21 - Spring Ck.

Temporal Representation:

Samples collected between 4/7/2001 and 7/10/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

CITIZEN WATER MONITORING QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE YUBA WATERSHED MONITORING COMMITTEE (June 30, 2008)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

229682

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Shellfish Harvesting

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228840

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Shellfish Harvesting

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SYRCL River Monitoring Program data for Spring Creek (Nevada County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 22 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH.

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-04 and 2014-10-11

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228812

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-04 and 2014-10-11

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

229333

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-04 and 2014-10-11

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

229335

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228814

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 21)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-04 and 2014-10-11

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228883

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123448, pH	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228813

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 502)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-01-29 and 2016-10-07

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee


DECISION ID	87497	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Arsenic
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of three samples exceed the CTR for COLD and zero of three samples exceed the MCL for MUN. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of three samples exceeded the CTR for COLD and zero of three samples exceeded the MCL for MUN and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87497, Arsenic	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

71986

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the three samples exceeded the Water Quality Objective.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. The CA Department of Health Services maximum contamination level (MCL) thought to be protective of drinking water for arsenic is 10 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from station 21 (Spring Creek).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected in 2003 and 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87497, Arsenic	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

71985

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the four samples exceeded the CTR criteria of 150 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

California Toxics Rule lists criterion continuous concentrations (expressed as a 4-day average) for dissolved arsenic to protect aquatic life in freshwater.

Guideline Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from station 21 (Spring Creek).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected in 2003 and 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	91643	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Indicator Bacteria
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of 14 water samples exceed the evaluation guideline for E. coli and none of the 14 water samples exceed the evaluation guideline for total coliform. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of 14 water samples exceed the evaluation guideline for E. coli and none of the 14 water samples exceed the evaluation guideline for total coliform, and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 91643, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

71988

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 14 samples exceeded the E. coli objective.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The E. coli concentration shall not exceed more than 235/100 ml. USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986.

Guideline Reference:

Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at SYRCL monitoring station 21 Sring Creek. WBID: CAR5173203120110209094624

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected approximately monthly between 2001 and 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

This data was collected under the Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba Watershed Council Monitoring Committee. Rev 1.3. qa12

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88231	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Lead
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of two samples exceeded the water quality objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88231, Lead	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

71990

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Neither of two samples exceeded the Water Quality Objective.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Basin Plan Objective for lead for the municipal drinking water Beneficial Use is 15 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Objective/Criterion Reference:

MCLs for Regulated Drinking Water Contaminants, California Department of Public Health.

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from station 21 (Spring Creek).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected in 2003 and 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	87500	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Zinc
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the four samples exceed the CTR criteria 4-day average concentration. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of four samples exceeded the CTR criteria and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87500, Zinc	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

71536

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the four samples exceeded the CTR criteria of 118 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (expressed as a 4-day average concentration) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a hardness of 100 mg/L was used.

Guideline Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from station 21 (Spring Creek).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected in 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88230	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Copper
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four of the five samples exceed the CTR 4-day average concentration. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Four of five samples exceed the CTR 4-day average concentration and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88230, Copper	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

71987

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Four of the five samples exceeded the CTR criteria of 9.3 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from station 21 (Spring Creek).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected in 2003 and 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	98319	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Iron
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the 15 samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of the 15 samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this exceeds the allowable frequency of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision: The water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 98319, Iron	Region 5
Spring Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

71989

Pollutant:

Iron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two of the 15 samples exceeded the recommended guideline of 1,000 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentrations are intended protect freshwater aquatic organisms from chronic exposures and are expressed as 4-day average concentrations. The recommended guideline for Iron is 1,000 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from station 21 (Spring Creek).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):